|
tradman
Dec 4, 2006, 2:46 PM
Post #76 of 97
(1540 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
In reply to: That's not what I was trying to do, Gabe, cracklover, and you damn well know it. Trying to read more into my post makes you look like an idiot at best. Would you feel better if I had said "Tough shit, tootsie... suck it up and get over it"? Quit acting like a jackass. If you have a problem with what I've said, or don't understand the context, perhaps you could ask me for clarification, rather than make up stupid bullshit theories.
Is this you trying to prove that you're not aggressive, obnoxious and dictatorial?
Don't you think being this defensive makes it kind of obvious that even you feel you may have overstepped the mark?
(This post was edited by tradman on Dec 4, 2006, 2:47 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 4, 2006, 3:24 PM
Post #77 of 97
(1530 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
tradman wrote: Is this you trying to prove that you're not aggressive, obnoxious and dictatorial? Don't you think being this defensive makes it kind of obvious that even you feel you may have overstepped the mark?
No.
What Cracklover said about me was wrong. He's making up things that will fit his nice little theory about me, and then accusing me of what he's already predetermined to be my mindset.
I tried to offer some sense of security to a person who sounded offended and hurt by these PMs, yet in a way that sounded funny but not heavy handed.
I could have said "If you tell me who the other person is, I shall ban them without second thought."
Or, I could, and DID, try to make it somewhat light hearted. And, while it seems I failed to get that point across, to insinuate any conspiracy or make up a theory about how I feel and my attitude based on one sentence, is, well, quite a stretch.
And, indeed, let the facts speak for themselves: I have banned nobody. I have kicked nobody off the site. I have handed out no punishment for this event. Res ipsa loquitur, I think the lawyers say.
Finally: If it is your belief that defending my statements and position means it is "kind of obvious that even you feel you may have overstepped the mark," then you're really in need of further introspection on issues, Tradman. You'd prefer, perhaps, that I didn't defend myself when someone makes up lies about me? What would THAT say to my character?
Oh, what choices I have...: Say nothing, and thus give tacit approval to anything said about me, or speak up and correct errors, which means that even I feel I may have overstepped the mark.
Nice.
(This post was edited by reno on Dec 4, 2006, 4:28 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
macherry
Dec 4, 2006, 3:31 PM
Post #78 of 97
(1524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15848
|
reno, i got what you were saying, but the tinfoil hat conspiracy crew wants to make more out of it.
geez, give it a rest guys, the paranoia is gonna get you!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Dec 4, 2006, 3:31 PM
Post #79 of 97
(1524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
I have not clicked on the link below and have no idea what sort of porn it will lead you to (my guess is gay porn, not that there is anything wrong with it). Click on it at your own risk and report back.
http://www.rockhard.com
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Dec 4, 2006, 4:48 PM
Post #80 of 97
(1495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
I didn't make up any lies, Reno. And quit calling me a conspiracy theorist, macherry. I simply read what you wrote, Reno. If you didn't mean what you wrote, all you have to do is say "I didn't mean it." Case closed. Saying "I was being funny" means "I meant it, and I thought it was funny to drop kick a user". Well it's not particularly funny.
I know a little about how stuff works - the fact that you haven't banned anyone does not mean that you're not overzealous in your protective instincts, it *could* mean that other mods are more level-headed, and they're making sure that things proceed as they should.
I'm not saying that you *are* overzealous - I don't know you personally, I don't know your persona on the site, and I don't know your history as a moderator. I have no further knowledge about your post in the thread than your post in the thread, and that post was fucked up! If you don't get why, then I'm not getting anywhere, and I'll just drop it. I'm not interested in getting anyone in trouble, certainly not you. I figured any level-headed person would get what I was saying, but apparently not. So just forget about it.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 4, 2006, 4:59 PM
Post #81 of 97
(1497 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
cracklover wrote: I didn't make up any lies, Reno. And quit calling me a conspiracy theorist, macherry. I simply read what you wrote, Reno. If you didn't mean what you wrote, all you have to do is say "I didn't mean it." Case closed.
So all I have to do is say "I didn't mean what you think I meant"?
Well, OK: I didn't mean what you think I meant.
Feel better now?
Moving on.....
(This post was edited by reno on Dec 4, 2006, 5:00 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Dec 4, 2006, 5:06 PM
Post #82 of 97
(1492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
reno wrote: Would you feel better if I had said "Tough shit, tootsie... suck it up and get over it"?
I don't think that would be a hell of a lot better, no. You go ahead and say things however you want, just don't be surprised if the users don't like it!
I appreciate your wanting to sympathize with the poster. How about something like:
"We take sexual harassment very seriously on rc.com. If you feel threatened by any individual, we will gladly intervene to insure that our TOS is enforced. If the guy still doesn't get the message, buh-bye."
Sympathetic, with a touch of humor, but neutral in terms of who's right/wrong, and without the sense of zeal in kicking out a user based on what little was said by the OP.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
macherry
Dec 4, 2006, 6:11 PM
Post #83 of 97
(1471 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15848
|
cracklover wrote: I didn't make up any lies, Reno. And quit calling me a conspiracy theorist, macherry. I simply read what you wrote, Reno. If you didn't mean what you wrote, all you have to do is say "I didn't mean it." Case closed. Saying "I was being funny" means "I meant it, and I thought it was funny to drop kick a user". Well it's not particularly funny. GO
my conspiracy theorist remark was not directed solely at one person.There seems to be a feeling that mods are being overzealous or heavy handed since the changeover to the new site. The sexual harassment policy has been around long before i was even a mod. Reno was just stating was i has posted........just different.
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Dec 4, 2006, 6:43 PM
Post #84 of 97
(1460 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
There have been several incidents where mods/owners have been heavy handed since the change over. Now I am sure you or someone are going to say define heavy handed. So I will rephrase; There have been actions by mods/owners that would not have taken place in the old RC.com. I'm not going to outline them yet again. In the mods/owners defense it seams that things are coming back to the center again. I am sure that I have been lumped into the "foil hat club" (which is pretty insulting, but I'll live) I don't think I have used the word conspiracy or have made false allegations towards anyone. Is it wrong to respectfully question the statements and acts of mods and owners without being accused of being a conspiracy theorist?
I too didn't take Reno's statement as a joke. Even if it was joking about kicking someone for an unproven act its still tacky at best. I don't think anyone here is arguing the policy on harassment. Maybe people including myself are a little thin skinned and are looking for the next "example" of over moderation I will give you that. Given the acts of the past couple of weeks why wouldn't we?
Mitt
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Dec 4, 2006, 8:13 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Dec 4, 2006, 6:49 PM
Post #85 of 97
(1457 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
to all that have been stalking and soliciting me...please stop...my dog is not dead yet.
Love
MaD
|
|
|
|
|
macherry
Dec 4, 2006, 8:55 PM
Post #86 of 97
(1420 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15848
|
madriver wrote: to all that have been stalking and soliciting me...please stop...my dog is not dead yet. Love MaD
i'd stop, but i can't help it
haven't boiled your rabbit.....yet
signed ur. stalker
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Dec 4, 2006, 9:59 PM
Post #88 of 97
(1392 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
wjca wrote: I have not clicked on the link below and have no idea what sort of porn it will lead you to (my guess is gay porn, not that there is anything wrong with it). Click on it at your own risk and report back. http://www.rockhard.com
Under Construction
The site you are trying to view does not currently have a default page. It may be in the process of being upgraded and configured.
Please try this site again later. If you still experience the problem, try contacting the Web site administrator.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Dec 4, 2006, 11:27 PM
Post #89 of 97
(1362 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
jt512 wrote: curt wrote: carabiner96 wrote: someone who posts here a lot who may have been drunk when he sent me this: Um, I'm way too old to hit on you too, sorry. But you seem like a fun person. Hey wait a minute--who else is old and drunk around here? Curt Including lurkers? *cheers* Jay
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Dec 5, 2006, 12:18 AM
Post #90 of 97
(1349 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
cracklover wrote: reno wrote: Would you feel better if I had said "Tough shit, tootsie... suck it up and get over it"? I don't think that would be a hell of a lot better, no. You go ahead and say things however you want, just don't be surprised if the users don't like it! I appreciate your wanting to sympathize with the poster. How about something like: "We take sexual harassment very seriously on rc.com. If you feel threatened by any individual, we will gladly intervene to insure that our TOS is enforced. If the guy still doesn't get the message, buh-bye." Sympathetic, with a touch of humor, but neutral in terms of who's right/wrong, and without the sense of zeal in kicking out a user based on what little was said by the OP. GO
Wouldn't use of the word "still," seem to also indicate a prejudgment of guilt?
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Dec 5, 2006, 1:01 AM
Post #91 of 97
(1337 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
j_ung wrote: cracklover wrote: reno wrote: Would you feel better if I had said "Tough shit, tootsie... suck it up and get over it"? I don't think that would be a hell of a lot better, no. You go ahead and say things however you want, just don't be surprised if the users don't like it! I appreciate your wanting to sympathize with the poster. How about something like: "We take sexual harassment very seriously on rc.com. If you feel threatened by any individual, we will gladly intervene to insure that our TOS is enforced. If the guy still doesn't get the message, buh-bye." Sympathetic, with a touch of humor, but neutral in terms of who's right/wrong, and without the sense of zeal in kicking out a user based on what little was said by the OP. GO Wouldn't use of the word "still," seem to also indicate a prejudgment of guilt?
Well, at least I eliminated the gleeful aspect of it. Okay, how about: "If we determine the guy is harassing you and won't stop..."
You're better at this than I. Probably plenty of people would be. There are many reasons why I wouldn't want to be a mod, but one of them is that I'm not sure I'd be a very good one.
I wonder... Maybe the trouble is that in matters like this, maybe it's not the best tack to be overly sympathetic to perceived accusations.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 5, 2006, 3:12 AM
Post #92 of 97
(1312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
cracklover wrote: I wonder... Maybe the trouble is that in matters like this, maybe it's not the best tack to be overly sympathetic to perceived accusations.
Right. Much better to be overly critical of the accuser and blame the victim... "She asked for it."
That'll work much better.
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Dec 5, 2006, 10:23 AM
Post #93 of 97
(1291 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
No, there's a thing called "being impartial".
That means not being sympathetic or critical, and it's what you're supposed to do when you're investigating serious allegations.
Again, is this your idea of a way to prove that you're a really competent mod? But showing that you don't even know that impartiality exists?
Would you like to comment on why it is that you treat users' concerns with almost amazing zeal... unless they're concerns about you or other mods?
It seems that those concerns get dismissed with accusations of conspiracy theories, sarcasm and excuses that you're "only joking".
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 5, 2006, 2:01 PM
Post #94 of 97
(1267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
A lecture from tradman on being impartial.... that's irony at it's finest.
You noticed, tradman, that what I've done is twist cracklover's comments into something that (I'm fairly sure) he didn't mean, then accuse him of that view without bothering to get clarification?
Why, that sounds rather familiar, doesn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
lisamariewillbe
Dec 5, 2006, 2:09 PM
Post #95 of 97
(1263 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2005
Posts: 1390
|
I love Reno ....... Isnt this horse completley rotted yet? I mean if you keep kicking it does your foots get stuck in the decayed flesh? 
If you dont like how Reno talks then dont suck up to him, just causes he is green doesnt mean he cant feel bias sometimes. Maybe it really gets to him when women feel wounded. I appreciate his effort to protect people. You other buttheads crack me up though
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 5, 2006, 8:36 PM
Post #97 of 97
(1220 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
tradman wrote: In reply to: A lecture from tradman on being impartial.... that's irony at it's finest. Reno, I don't have to be impartial because, well, I'm not a moderator.
At least you admit it.... first step and all that.
In reply to: You are, by the way. Because you seem to have forgotten.
Indeed. And you've no doubt noted that my actions have been in compliance with that impartiality. Something you're not capable of claiming, sadly.
(This post was edited by reno on Dec 6, 2006, 2:35 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
